Compact quality camera choice for hiking/backpacking?

Messages
1,284
Location
NW England
I have a few digital cameras but my newest - the mirrorless Nikon 1 J1 - is now 10 years old and I don't want to take a system camera out wild camping. I don't want to be carrying/swapping lenses but I still want a camera with at least a 1" 20MP sensor. I'm not interested in video but it seems that it has to be in there for cameras to be marketable today...my interest is in good quality still images. I have sort of narrowed my search down to the following three, but would appreciate any views from those who might have used any of these or simply have views about the best features for hiking-related photography. Here are my current three options and a quick note on why I've selected them: (Not in order of preference!)

1. Panasonic Lumix TZ200 Good sensor and 15x zoom, with lots of other features, but at £550 it's around £150 above what I was looking to pay. Highly rated as a travel camera for flexible use...but is the extra cost worth it?

2. Canon Powershot G9X MkII Again, a good sensor but much lower zoom, and right on my target budget. Often mentioned as one of the best 'bang for your buck' cameras in terms of image quality. Main weaknesses seem to be be lack of 4K video (I really don't care about that) and limited zoom...certainly compared to the TZ200. Is the TZ200 zoom etc worth the extra £150???

3. Fujifilm XF-10 Now, this one is a bit of a curve ball...No zoom but a fixed/prime lens, and a bigger sensor providing high quality shots, well within my target budget at sub-£400. I have considered dropping a zoom to concentrate on (hopefully) better image quality and more effort in composition. I know some photographers swear by the idea of a fixed lens forcing the user to work harder on this and to learn more about the limits and benefits of a specific lens. I've seen this referred to as almost the same camera as the higher end (£1K+) fixed-lens Fujis but without the EVF. Is the bigger sensor worth the sacrifice of the zoom...does it deliver better images in reality?

Questions, questions, questions...I know!!
If you have any views on these or alternative cameras I'd sure like to hear them :) (y)
 
@Greybeard - continuing our conversation from another thread -

I'm not sure I can be of any help here - I have never used cameras of this type - but might venture a couple of general observations on taking pictures while on the hill. My point of view is biased by the fact that for many years I have only used Leica M series film cameras when walking, wild camping or climbing. They are simple, virtually indestructible, they don't need batteries to function and - most importantly - the optical quality is supreme. I don't need to dig into 15 sub-menus to make the thing do what I want. The very opposite of the day job cameras. I only use black and white film. That being said -

Lenses - I am firmly in the camp of using fixed focal lengths. Zooms are fragile, prone to the ingress of water and grit. At a comparable price point a fixed lens will be optically superior - end of. Zooms are just another unnecessary distraction - in my opinion, most of the work of a good picture is done before the camera comes to your eye. In addition, they use a lot of power, relatively speaking, doing their in - out, whirry thing.

Power consumption - I notice none of the cameras on your list has an optical viewfinder. The single biggest drain on the battery will be the screen on the back.

Sorry not to be of more help - good luck in your quest - yours - I.

Rannoch Moor - Leica M6 and 35mm -

Rannoch1TSR.jpg
 
@Greybeard - continuing our conversation from another thread -

I'm not sure I can be of any help here - I have never used cameras of this type - but might venture a couple of general observations on taking pictures while on the hill. My point of view is biased by the fact that for many years I have only used Leica M series film cameras when walking, wild camping or climbing. They are simple, virtually indestructible, they don't need batteries to function and - most importantly - the optical quality is supreme. I don't need to dig into 15 sub-menus to make the thing do what I want. The very opposite of the day job cameras. I only use black and white film. That being said -

Lenses - I am firmly in the camp of using fixed focal lengths. Zooms are fragile, prone to the ingress of water and grit. At a comparable price point a fixed lens will be optically superior - end of. Zooms are just another unnecessary distraction - in my opinion, most of the work of a good picture is done before the camera comes to your eye. In addition, they use a lot of power, relatively speaking, doing their in - out, whirry thing.

Power consumption - I notice none of the cameras on your list has an optical viewfinder. The single biggest drain on the battery will be the screen on the back.

Sorry not to be of more help - good luck in your quest - yours - I.

Rannoch Moor - Leica M6 and 35mm -

View attachment 68704
Thanks Digimonkey...more helpful than you might think!
Many years ago (1980) I had a Panasonic OM10 and set up a dark room...only using B&W 'cos it was all I could afford...and I've always liked monochrome for mood etc. Now, I tend to go for lazier options and colour but I have been concerned about the lack of a viewfinder on either the Canon or the Fujifilm cameras in my list. In fact, the thing I dislike most about using phones as cameras is the inability to see the screen in poor/bright light and therefore not being able to frame shots properly or hold the camera steady against my face. On that basis (and many other factors) the Panasonic Lumix keeps jumping to the front of my choices because it does have an EVF that is reported to be 'pin sharp', in addition to the 15x zoom, etc...etc. You've helped me decide that lack of a viewfinder is a deal-breaker! I take your point about zooms gathering dust etc and I do like the idea of a better image from a prime lens, but if I want to do some macro and landscape shots, the Lumix is looking difficult to beat.
I'm not likely to find an optical view finder on a compact camera in my budget area but an EVF is much more common...so I'll keep looking and see if anything beats the Lumix.
Thanks again, Digimonkey(y)(y)(y)
(Great photo btw!)
 
Panasonic Lumix keeps jumping to the front of my choices because it does have an EVF
Ah - fair point - I only looked at pictures of the front of the models you listed - that and I had no idea what EVF meant. :)

That would be a major plus in my opinion - another issue with using the back screen - the same applies to a mobile - is that it is really difficult to keep the picture properly level and not squint. I think that the collaboration between Leica and Panasonic has been good for both companies - one good at designing and manufacturing glass - the other, electronics and image processing software. I liked the quirk with the Fuji that you can set it to emulate their film but it probably is really only a gimmick, as the same end can be achieved with any digital image with some Photoshop plug-ins. Cheers - I.
 
It is stretching the budget a little bit but what about a Sony A6000 ? there is a very small fixed focus lens available for them cheaply.

Downside they do eat batteries , upside the batteries are cheap and light.
R. - A former staffer colleague - is seriously into his astro-photography and showed me stuff he had done with Sony A series cameras - the results were staggeringly good - pin and edge to edge sharp - with seriously long exposures - when you would expect even the best of sensors to start having a fit - I.
 
R. - A former staffer colleague - is seriously into his astro-photography and showed me stuff he had done with Sony A series cameras - the results were staggeringly good - pin and edge to edge sharp - with seriously long exposures - when you would expect even the best of sensors to start having a fit - I.
I - As you know I am a relative beginner , but a friend of mine was selling one as he had it as a backup camera , and I wanted something as a step up from my phone, I only have the standard 16-50 lens it came with. I have only got it recently and I am still learning it , but to my eye it is very, very good, and seems incredibly versatile on the manual mode.
 
It is stretching the budget a little bit but what about a Sony A6000 ? there is a very small fixed focus lens available for them cheaply.

Downside they do eat batteries , upside the batteries are cheap and light.
Ah yes...very nice camera and performance from what I've heard and read. However...I don't want a system camera with interchangeable lenses...my current Nikon 1 J1 takes extremely nice shots and I have a couple of Nikor lenses for it: 10-50 and 50-110. I'm specifically looking for a slightly more compact camera that doesn't have interchangeable lenses. My main criteria based on using several different cameras when hiking/backpacking (including my Nikon) are:
  • Min: 1 inch, 20Mp sensor
  • View finder
  • No lens cap (I.e. must be electronic within the lens)
  • Preferably a zoom (for macro in particular) but I would consider foregoing this for a prime lens but using larger sensor (i.e better image quality)
  • Reasonably lightweight (300g or thereabouts)
  • Reasonably compact (can carry in a belt pouch easily)
Thanks for the suggestion Russell...I appreciate your interest(y)

Increasingly I'm coming round to the idea that the Panasonic Lumix TZ200 is the only one i've found that ticks all of the boxes...apart from it's price!
 
Back
Top Bottom